I feel pretty certain (without knowing one bit) that if there was and actual need to speak to people in orbit regularly that it would be a simple matter. I can call someone on the other side of the world with my phone if I wanted.

Also, I never saw Kirk playing Angry Birds on his communicator.

Of course tri-corders are a different story--though I bet we'll get something very similar to that tech well before 200+ years from now

I find it interesting how much more advanced our cell phones are now than the communicators they used on Star Trek ToS

Well I don't know, can you make a cell phone call to someone in orbit?

A presidential phone call was placed to an orbiting Apollo spacecraft back in the late 60's, Im sure the tech exists to do so with a cell phone, its just not practical. Besides the roaming charges would be outrageous.

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

and through shields too. and across multiple light years, if in post-Abrams ST. at least that has a basis in known science

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

Kind of splitting hairs since the Enterprise when in orbit is functionally a satellite relay

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

Kind of splitting hairs since the Enterprise when in orbit is functionally a satellite relay

But how high would the Enterprise orbit?

The space shuttle typically had an orbit of 200 miles, but would sometimes go to 400 miles. source

Satellite phone satellites orbit at about 120 miles, while geosynchronous orbit satellites (DirecTV) are at a whopping 22,000 miles high.

In "The Savage Curtain" Spock told Abraham Lincoln that the Enterprise was orbiting at 643 miles above the surface of Excalbia, but in "Relics" it was mentioned that the Enterprise was in a synchronous orbit. Then in "Future's End", they mention that the Voyager is orbiting the earth at about 12,000 mile "high orbit."

That's kind of nutty, since in Star Trek you usually hear them either call for "standard orbit" or "high orbit", and since a geosynchronous orbit seems logical to use as a standard, it doesn't make any sense for high orbit to be lower than standard.

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

Kind of splitting hairs since the Enterprise when in orbit is functionally a satellite relay

But how high would the Enterprise orbit?

The space shuttle typically had an orbit of 200 miles, but would sometimes go to 400 miles. source

Satellite phone satellites orbit at about 120 miles, while geosynchronous orbit satellites (DirecTV) are at a whopping 22,000 miles high.

In "The Savage Curtain" Spock told Abraham Lincoln that the Enterprise was orbiting at 643 miles above the surface of Excalbia, but in "Relics" it was mentioned that the Enterprise was in a synchronous orbit. Then in "Future's End", they mention that the Voyager is orbiting the earth at about 12,000 mile "high orbit."

That's kind of nutty, since in Star Trek you usually hear them either call for "standard orbit" or "high orbit", and since a geosynchronous orbit seems logical to use as a standard, it doesn't make any sense for high orbit to be lower than standard.

My in-laws just bought a new Acura MDX with all the fixin's, and there's a lot of "from the future" technology in it. The adaptive cruise control will adjust throttle or even brakes to make sure you keep a safe distance from the car in front of you, the "lane keeping assist system" uses cameras to view lane markers and will actively nudge the steering wheel to keep you in-lane, and the "forward collision warning system" will yell at you to slam the brakes if it thinks you're on your way toward smashing into something.

Whether or not I personally trust any of these systems is another story.

I'm a fan of retro-futurism. I've read a lot of old pieces, and seen a lot of predictions from the turn of the century through the 70s, and the number one thing they get wrong is scale. Nobody ever really conceived at how efficient miniaturization of technology would be. Everyone predicted that we'd have computers in our homes. Nobody predicted that we'd have them in our pocket.

Well yes, but it wouldn't be an actual cell phone call - it would be a call patched through to like a satellite. The bit about the communicators is that they somehow functioned ship-to-planet on their own network.

Kind of splitting hairs since the Enterprise when in orbit is functionally a satellite relay

But how high would the Enterprise orbit?

The space shuttle typically had an orbit of 200 miles, but would sometimes go to 400 miles. source

Satellite phone satellites orbit at about 120 miles, while geosynchronous orbit satellites (DirecTV) are at a whopping 22,000 miles high.

In "The Savage Curtain" Spock told Abraham Lincoln that the Enterprise was orbiting at 643 miles above the surface of Excalbia, but in "Relics" it was mentioned that the Enterprise was in a synchronous orbit. Then in "Future's End", they mention that the Voyager is orbiting the earth at about 12,000 mile "high orbit."

That's kind of nutty, since in Star Trek you usually hear them either call for "standard orbit" or "high orbit", and since a geosynchronous orbit seems logical to use as a standard, it doesn't make any sense for high orbit to be lower than standard.

In conclusion, Voyager sucked.

Geosynchronous just means that the satellite/starship is maintaining orbit above a fixed point on the ground. You can do that at 100 miles or 50,000 miles. Obviously the higher the orbit the faster the satellite must be to maintain position, but geosynchronous isn't tied to an altitude.

Geostationary means that it's maintaining an orbit over a fixed point on the ground.

Geosynchronous means that it passes over the same point of the planet at the same time every day.

To maintain an orbit, you have to be maintaining enough speed that you are essentially falling constantly due to gravitational effects. And you either have to maintain a certain speed of orbit, or maintain a lot of upward thrust to counteract gravity if you are not maintaining the appropriate forward speed.

I'm a fan of retro-futurism. I've read a lot of old pieces, and seen a lot of predictions from the turn of the century through the 70s, and the number one thing they get wrong is scale. Nobody ever really conceived at how efficient miniaturization of technology would be. Everyone predicted that we'd have computers in our homes. Nobody predicted that we'd have them in our pocket.

While not a prediction, one of the important factors in the early development of Issac Asimovs Foundation was the miniaturization of tech. Asimov did envision it, even if it was in a novel.

Geosynchronous just means that the satellite/starship is maintaining orbit above a fixed point on the ground. You can do that at 100 miles or 50,000 miles. Obviously the higher the orbit the faster the satellite must be to maintain position, but geosynchronous isn't tied to an altitude.

I'm apparently getting the terms geosynchronous and geostationary mixed up, but for a geostationary orbit there is exactly one altitude that makes it work, 22,236 miles high for earth and 1,782 miles for Kerbin. Unless you're constantly burning your engines, I suppose, which is something the Enterprise certainly could do.